al gore/mike bloomberg

[WalterMitty]

would be a great independent ticket.

[Goldwater]

would be a great the worst independent ticket.

[Vega]

Al Gore isn't going to be running as an Independent or as anything for President. Best (or worst case depending on who you are) case he'll be the VP nominee.

[WalterMitty]

Al Gore isn't going to be running as an Independent or as anything for President. Best (or worst case depending on who you are) case he'll be the VP nominee.

why on earth would he forsake the $$ he earns being al gore to be vp again?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Al Gore isn't going to be running as an Independent or as anything for President. Best (or worst case depending on who you are) case he'll be the VP nominee.

No way would he ever come out of political retirement to be Veep again.

On the other hand, he could very possibly step up as a "unity candidate" for the Democrats if the primary race looks like it's coming down to Gaffe-prone Biden, unlikable O'Malley, and radical Sanders.

[Sumner 1868]

Why would Gore run with a Wall Street yuppie who mismanaged a city for a dozen years?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Why would Gore run with a Wall Street yuppie who mismanaged a city for a dozen years?

Believe me, Bloomberg nostalgia is coming on hard in New York.

[Sumner 1868]

Why would Gore run with a Wall Street yuppie who mismanaged a city for a dozen years?

Believe me, Bloomberg nostalgia is coming on hard in New York.

Understandable, but my question still stands.

[Thunderbird is the word]

Hide your metal albums, cigarettes and big gulps!

[Thunderbird is the word]

In all seriousness I have mixed feelings about Gore but as a native New Yorker, seeing what Bloomborg did to my city I absolutely detest him and as a lefty am tempted to punch any supposed liberal that says "oh he's so great on 'public health'/guns" because apparently allowing hospitals to close and be developed into luxury condos is "public health."

[Thunderbird is the word]

Why would Gore run with a Wall Street yuppie who mismanaged a city for a dozen years?

Believe me, Bloomberg nostalgia is coming on hard in New York.

 among upper east side yuppies and racist staten islanders maybe...

[Thunderbird is the word]

would be a great the worst independent ticket.

[traininthedistance]

In all seriousness I have mixed feelings about Gore but as a native New Yorker, seeing what Bloomborg did to my city I absolutely detest him and as a lefty am tempted to punch any supposed liberal that says "oh he's so great on 'public health'/guns" because apparently allowing hospitals to close and be developed into luxury condos is "public health."

What's your opinion of Janette Sadik-Kahn?

What the Bloomberg administration did (or tried to do) for the environment, transpo infrastructure, and street safety was– especially from a left-of-center perspective– incredibly important and incredibly positive.  

I am willing to risk a punch over that.  For the record: a) I live in Flatbush, spiritually and physically far from both the UES and the South Shore; and b) I voted for Sal Albanese in the primary, in part because he was the only candidate with the cojones to do the right thing and endorse congestion pricing (the rest of his platform was similarly excellent).

...

(This should not be construed as an endorsement of Mitty's proposal, which I think we can all agree would be a disaster.)

[bedstuy]

I think Bloomberg was a good mayor.  He had his blind-spots, but he was good on major issues, especially land use and transportation.  And, he was an effective executive and cheerleader for NYC, which matters more than pure partisan political concerns.

[Thunderbird is the word]

In all seriousness I have mixed feelings about Gore but as a native New Yorker, seeing what Bloomborg did to my city I absolutely detest him and as a lefty am tempted to punch any supposed liberal that says "oh he's so great on 'public health'/guns" because apparently allowing hospitals to close and be developed into luxury condos is "public health."

What's your opinion of Janette Sadik-Kahn?

What the Bloomberg administration did (or tried to do) for the environment, transpo infrastructure, and street safety was– especially from a left-of-center perspective– incredibly important and incredibly positive.  

I am willing to risk a punch over that.  For the record: a) I live in Flatbush, spiritually and physically far from both the UES and the South Shore; and b) I voted for Sal Albanese in the primary, because he was the only candidate with the cojones to do the right thing and endorse congestion pricing.

...

(This should not be construed as an endorsement of Mitty's proposal, which I think we can all agree would be a disaster.)

Not familiar with her to be honest. The environment and infrastructure aren't my issues so much as the fact that he seemed completely oblivious to the plight of anybody who wasn't rich in the city and laid off teachers while the city had a surplus, that he turned (or continued Giulianis trend) of turning the city into a virtual police state for black and brown New Yorkers and the way he treated protestors at the Republican convention. I'm also not the biggest fan of the anti-smoking and anti soda crusades which just strike me as classist. I could go on but you get the idea.

[traininthedistance]

In all seriousness I have mixed feelings about Gore but as a native New Yorker, seeing what Bloomborg did to my city I absolutely detest him and as a lefty am tempted to punch any supposed liberal that says "oh he's so great on 'public health'/guns" because apparently allowing hospitals to close and be developed into luxury condos is "public health."

What's your opinion of Janette Sadik-Kahn?

What the Bloomberg administration did (or tried to do) for the environment, transpo infrastructure, and street safety was– especially from a left-of-center perspective– incredibly important and incredibly positive.  

I am willing to risk a punch over that.  For the record: a) I live in Flatbush, spiritually and physically far from both the UES and the South Shore; and b) I voted for Sal Albanese in the primary, because he was the only candidate with the cojones to do the right thing and endorse congestion pricing.

...

(This should not be construed as an endorsement of Mitty's proposal, which I think we can all agree would be a disaster.)

Not familiar with her to be honest. The environment and infrastructure aren't my issues so much as the fact that he seemed completely oblivious to the plight of anybody who wasn't rich in the city and laid off teachers while the city had a surplus, that he turned (or continued Giulianis trend) of turning the city into a virtual police state for black and brown New Yorkers and the way he treated protestors at the Republican convention. I'm also not the biggest fan of the anti-smoking and anti soda crusades which just strike me as classist. I could go on but you get the idea.

Well, the environment and infrastructure are my issues, so you'll have to understand if I pretty much always take them into account– and hope that other folks do so as well.

His approach to policing/race was not as bad as Giuliani, but that's a ludicrously low bar. It was utterly awful and the worst part of his tenure.  No argument there.

As for the "soda ban", I'm perpetually amazed that people actually care about that. The whole shebang seemed like just an awful sideshow sh*tshow. Sure, the ban's proposal was ham-handed and kinda sloppy/unfair on the specifics, and even if you've got the science on your side it's a pretty dumb use of one's political capital.  But OTOH you had Coke and Pepsi and their big-money lobbyists pouring millions into advertising all the while painting themselves as little-guy grassroots populists striking a blow against the Big Bad Nanny State or something.  I still can't get over the hypocrisy of that. Think we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Thunderbird is the word]

In all seriousness I have mixed feelings about Gore but as a native New Yorker, seeing what Bloomborg did to my city I absolutely detest him and as a lefty am tempted to punch any supposed liberal that says "oh he's so great on 'public health'/guns" because apparently allowing hospitals to close and be developed into luxury condos is "public health."

What's your opinion of Janette Sadik-Kahn?

What the Bloomberg administration did (or tried to do) for the environment, transpo infrastructure, and street safety was– especially from a left-of-center perspective– incredibly important and incredibly positive.  

I am willing to risk a punch over that.  For the record: a) I live in Flatbush, spiritually and physically far from both the UES and the South Shore; and b) I voted for Sal Albanese in the primary, because he was the only candidate with the cojones to do the right thing and endorse congestion pricing.

...

(This should not be construed as an endorsement of Mitty's proposal, which I think we can all agree would be a disaster.)

Not familiar with her to be honest. The environment and infrastructure aren't my issues so much as the fact that he seemed completely oblivious to the plight of anybody who wasn't rich in the city and laid off teachers while the city had a surplus, that he turned (or continued Giulianis trend) of turning the city into a virtual police state for black and brown New Yorkers and the way he treated protestors at the Republican convention. I'm also not the biggest fan of the anti-smoking and anti soda crusades which just strike me as classist. I could go on but you get the idea.

Well, the environment and infrastructure are my issues, so you'll have to understand if I pretty much always take them into account– and hope that other folks do so as well.

His approach to policing/race was not as bad as Giuliani, but that's a ludicrously low bar. It was utterly awful and the worst part of his tenure.  No argument there.

As for the "soda ban", I'm perpetually amazed that people actually care about that. The whole shebang seemed like just an awful sideshow sh*tshow. Sure, the ban's proposal was ham-handed and kinda sloppy/unfair on the specifics, and even if you've got the science on your side it's a pretty dumb use of one's political capital.  But OTOH you had Coke and Pepsi and their big-money lobbyists pouring millions into advertising all the while painting themselves as little-guy grassroots populists striking a blow against the Big Bad Nanny State or something.  I still can't get over the hypocrisy of that. Think we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

Those issues aren't unimportant to me, and if Bloomberg did achieve some progress in those areas well even a broken clock. As far as the soda thing goes, it's true that a lot of that grassroots activism might have been astroturfed but even so I really do have a problem with a billionaire being so concerned about what poor people are drinking especially when the problems of obesity have a lot more to do with government policy in terms of subsidizing corn growers.

[IceSpear]

This is exactly the type of ticket that the moderate heroes, Very Serious Pundits, and WalterMitties of the world would adore, but that would have trouble cracking 2% in the real world.

[Thunderbird is the word]

This is exactly the type of ticket that the moderate heroes, Very Serious Pundits, and WalterMitties of the world would adore, but that would have trouble cracking 2% in the real world.

[Simfan34]

What's your opinion of Janette Sadik-Kahn?

FF of the FFs.

Of course I'd say "the best ticket ever" would be Bloomberg/Huntsman, but that stems just as much from my own peculiar preferences as the supposed brilliance of a Gore/Bloomberg ticket likewise does from WalterMitty's idiosyncrasies.

The soda ban was silliness, yes, but it was minor silliness, and well-intentioned minor silliness at that, at least (which is more than can be said of most political silliness these days).

Why would Gore run with a Wall Street yuppie who mismanaged a city for a dozen years?

Bloomberg fought hard to make the right moves that would improve New Yorkers' quality of life and the well-being of the city as a whole: financial security, transportation, education, housing, job creation, economic diversification, security, sustainable budgeting, park improvement, tourism promotion, and so on.

This was all done, it also should not be forgotten, in the wake, firstly, of 9/11, which, while perhaps not quite as epic an event as Rudy Giuliani might have you think, did create a genuine crisis of confidence in the city and its ability to recover. Just about every major bank scrambled to secure a foothold elsewhere (really only UBS went through with it) as reasonable people predicted that, between security fears and the opportunities afforded by computing power, finance would flee Lower Manhattan into the four winds, never to return In the end it mainly meant moving to Midtown or in some cases New Jersey; most markers of economic activity rebounded in full by 2003-4.

This cannot be taken for granted, one cannot assume a mayor not as skilled as Bloomberg would have been able to produce the same result (it really did help, it must be said, that the mayor was someone who had made billions by knowing the needs and wants of finance). Then you had the financial crisis, which devastated the aforementioned financial sector and, had the city been in less capable hands, could have been even worse for the city.

Instead the city weathered the recession better than most of the country, and the city's economy emerged from the crisis more diversified and less dependent on finance than it had been before (even if it still was more reliant on finance than would be ideal), with tech and tourism leading the charge. The growth of the tourism sector, in particular, has meant large scale blue-collar job-creation, and not just a few well-paying white-collar jobs for the "creative class" as the trope goes.

With this alone Bloomberg would have been a fantastic mayor. But the truly great thing he did was to parlay this financial and economic stability into the ability to take the kind of measures, as I described earlier, that would not only ensure future success and economic competitiveness for the city, but raise the standard of living and quality of life enjoyed by the common New Yorker. Bloomberg's transport policy was not that of someone solely concerned with travel by chauffeured sedan. His education policy was not that of someone only interested in private education. Self-interested plutocrats would not try the conditional cash transfer program in the country nor would they launch its largest affordable housing scheme., nor would they expend significant effort and political capital to improve the quality of education for low income families... and so forth.

I've waxed poetic about Bloomberg along these lines many times before (he's not very popular with the Atlas Forum, and so I've frequently felt the urge to refute what I see as outright derangement about the man), and if you really want to see more of this you can search for it. But I think I have made my point.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Typical waltermitty.

[VPH]

If we want to imagine centrist third party runs, here are a few to think about (I know none of these would realistically happen):
Manchin/Huntsman
Huntsman/Bloomberg
Bloomberg/Collins

[Thunderbird is the word]

If we want to imagine centrist third party runs, here are a few to think about (I know none of these would realistically happen):
Manchin/Huntsman
Huntsman/Bloomberg
Bloomberg/Collins

Booker/Huntsman

Cuomo/Hagel

I also remember around 2007 John Stewart joking about people talking about a possible Unity08 ticket of Bloomberg-Hagel sounding like a rare genetic disease. "Vote Bloomberg-Hagel, better then Tay-Sachs!"

[Pyro]

I'll sooner vote Republican than for any ticket with Bloomberg on it.

[Thunderbird is the word]

I'll sooner vote Republican than for any ticket with Bloomberg on it.